PR Interval as a Novel Therapeutic Target of Ivabradine Therapy-Prognostic Impact of Ivabradine-Induced PR Prolongation in Heart Failure Patients

BACKGROUND

Ivabradine reduces heart rate by inhibiting the "funny current" expressed on the sinoatrial node and improves mortality and morbidity in patients with systolic heart failure and sinus tachycardia. The funny current is known to be expressed also on the atrioventricular node according to experimental studies. However, the impact of ivabradine on PR interval remained unknown.

METHODS

Patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction of less than 50% who received 1 month of ivabradine were screened. Electrocardiographic and echocardiographic data, particularly concerning heart rate, the PR interval, and trans-mitral flow pattern, were collected at baseline and 1-month follow-up. The primary endpoint was defined as the composite of cardiovascular death and hospital readmission for worsening heart failure following ivabradine administration.

RESULTS

In the cohort of 29 enrolled patients (median age: 66 years, 62% male), the median baseline heart rate was 86 beats per minute and the median PR interval was 168 milliseconds. Following ivabradine administration, a significant decrease of 20 beats per minute in the heart rate and a significant increase of 24 milliseconds in the PR interval were observed. The truncated interval of the A-wave, detected in the trans-mitral flow, consistently demonstrated a negative correlation with the PR interval both before and after the administration of ivabradine. During a median of 1.8 years of follow-up, six patients reached the primary endpoint. A combination of heart rate reduction and PR prolongation following ivabradine administration, both of which were independent factors associated with the primary endpoint (p < 0.05 for both), was associated with greater freedom from the primary endpoint compared with either/neither of them (p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Ivabradine seems to prolong PR interval, which is a novel surrogate marker of favorable clinical outcomes in patients with systolic heart failure. This effect may be associated with the dynamics of the trans-mitral flow pattern, in conjunction with heart rate and the PR interval. Clinical implications of PR interval-guided ivabradine therapy remains the future concern.

Progress in Cardiac Resynchronisation Therapy and Optimisation

Cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) has become the cornerstone of heart failure (HF) treatment. Despite the obvious benefit from this therapy, an estimated 30% of CRT patients do not respond ("non-responders"). The cause of "non-response" is multi-factorial and includes suboptimal device settings. To optimise CRT settings, echocardiography has been considered the gold standard but has limitations: it is user dependent and consumes time and resources. CRT proprietary algorithms have been developed to perform device optimisation efficiently and with limited resources. In this review, we discuss CRT optimisation including the various adopted proprietary algorithms and conduction system pacing.

Atrio-Ventricular Dyssynchrony After Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: An Unusual Contributor to Heart Failure Symptoms

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is the mainstay for the management of systolic heart failure with LVEF <35% and evidence of dyssynchrony despite optimal medical therapy. After CRT placement, persistent dyssynchronization is possible and can contribute to heart failure symptoms despite a well-functioning CRT device. Echo-guided imaging can be beneficial for the optimization of CRT in selected patients who have evidence of continued dyssynchrony despite a well-functioning CRT device.

Advances in cardiac resynchronization and implantable cardioverter/defibrillator therapy: Medtronic Cobalt and Crome

Cardiovascular implantable electronic devices have revolutionized the management of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. New device generations tend to be launched every few years, with incremental improvements in performance and safety and with an expectation that these will improve patient management and outcomes while remaining cost-effective. As a result, today's cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) and implantable cardioverter defibrillator devices are quite different from the pioneering but often bulky devices of the late 20th century. This review discusses new and improved features developed to target specific needs in managing heart failure patients, some of which are especially pertinent to the current worldwide healthcare situation, with focus on the latest generation of CRTs with defibrillator (CRT-Ds) and implantable cardioverter defibrillators from Medtronic.

Cardiovascular Imaging Applications in Clinical Management of Patients Treated with Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

Cardiovascular imaging techniques, including echocardiography, nuclear cardiology, multi-slice computed tomography, and cardiac magnetic resonance, have wide applications in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). Our aim was to provide an update of cardiovascular imaging applications before, during, and after implantation of a CRT device. Before CRT implantation, cardiovascular imaging techniques may integrate current clinical and electrocardiographic selection criteria in the identification of patients who may most likely benefit from CRT. Assessment of myocardial viability by ultrasound, nuclear cardiology, or cardiac magnetic resonance may guide optimal left ventricular (LV) lead positioning and help to predict LV function improvement by CRT. During implantation, echocardiographic techniques may guide in the identification of the best site of LV pacing. After CRT implantation, cardiovascular imaging plays an important role in the assessment of CRT response, which can be defined according to LV reverse remodeling, function and dyssynchrony indices. Furthermore, imaging techniques may be used for CRT programming optimization during follow-up, especially in patients who turn out to be non-responders. However, in the clinical settings, the use of proposed functional indices for different imaging techniques is still debated, due to their suboptimal feasibility and reproducibility. Moreover, identifying CRT responders before implantation and turning non-responders into responders at follow-up remain challenging issues.

Long-term follow-up after cardiac resynchronization therapy-optimization in a real-world setting: A single-center cohort study

BACKGROUND

Suboptimal device programming is among the reasons for reduced response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). However, whether systematic optimization is beneficial remains unclear, particularly late after CRT implantation. The aim of this single-center cohort study was to assess the effect of systematic atrioventricular delay (AVD) optimization on echocardiographic and device parameters.

METHODS

Patients undergoing CRT optimization at the University Hospital Zurich between March 2011 and January 2013, for whom a follow-up was available, were included. AVD optimization was based on 12-lead electrocardiography (ECG) and echocardiographic left ventricular inflow characteristics. Parameters were assessed at the time of CRT optimization and follow-up, and were compared between patients with AVD optimization (intervention group) and those for whom no AVD optimization was deemed necessary (control group).

RESULTS

Eighty-one patients with a mean age of 64 ± 11 years were included in the analysis. In 73% of patients, AVD was deemed suboptimal and was changed accordingly. After a median follow-up time of 10.4 (IQR 6.2 to 13.2) months, the proportion of patients with sufficient biventricular pacing (> 97% pacing) was greater in the intervention group (78%) compared to controls (50%). Furthermore, AVD adaptation was associated with an improvement in interventricular mechanical delay (decrease of 6.6 ± 26.2 ms vs. increase of 4.3 ± 17.7 ms, p = 0.034) and intraventricular septal-to-lateral delay (decrease of 0.9 ± 48.1 ms vs. increase of 15.9 ± 15.7 ms, p = 0.038), as assessed by tissue Doppler imaging. Accordingly, a reduction was observed in mitral regurgitation along with a trend towards reduced left ventricular volumes.

CONCLUSIONS

In this "real-world" setting systematic AVD optimization was associated with beneficial effects regarding biventricular pacing and left ventricular remodeling. These data show that AVD optimization may be advantageous in selected CRT patients.

Extremely short setting of optimal sensed atrioventricular interval in patients after Fontan procedure with implanted dual-chamber pacemaker

BACKGROUND

Atrioventricular interval optimisation is important in patients with dual-chamber pacing, especially with heart failure. In patients with CHD, especially in those with Fontan circulation, the systemic atrial contraction is supposed to be more important than in patients without structural heart disease.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated two patients after Fontan procedure with dual-chamber pacemaker with a unique setting of optimal sensed atrioventricular interval.

RESULTS

The optimal sensed atrioventricular interval determined by echocardiogram was extremely short sensed atrioventricular interval at 25 and 30 ms in both cases; however, the actual P wave and ventricular pacing interval showed 180 and 140 ms, respectively. In both cases, the atrial epicardial leads were implanted on the opposite site of the origin of their own atrial rhythm. The time differences between sensed atrioventricular interval and actual P wave and ventricular pacing interval occurred because of the site of the epicardial atrial pacing leads and the intra-atrial conduction delay.

CONCLUSION

We need to consider the origin of the atrial rhythm, the site of the epicardial atrial lead, and the atrial conduction delay by using electrocardiogram and X-ray when we set the optimal sensed atrioventricular interval in complicated CHD.

Exercise test is essential in LV-only fusion CRT pacing without right ventricle lead

Purpose: Left ventricle (LV)-only pacing is non-inferior to biventricular pacing but permanent fusion pacing is needed to ensure cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) responsiveness. The role of systematic exercise testing (ET) in these patients has not been established. This study was designed to assess clinical and therapeutic implications (device programming/drugs) of systematic ET in patients requiring fusion-pacing CRT without an right ventricle (RV) lead. Methods: Consecutive patients with a right atrium/LV-only dual-chamber (DDD) pacing system were included. Prospective data were obtained: device interrogation, ET, and echocardiography at every 6-month follow-up visit. CRT assessment during ET included maximal heart rate, beat-to-beat echocardiography analysis of LV fusion pacing, LV loss of capture, and improvement in exercise capacity. If LV loss of capture or unsatisfactory LV fusion pacing occurred, reprogramming was individualized for each patient and ET redone. Results: A total of 55 patients (29 male) aged 62±11 years were included. During follow-up (39±18 months), a total of 235 ETs were performed, with mean exercise load 6.4±1.3 metabolic equivalents of task (118±35 W, maximal heart rate 119±17 beats/min). Twenty patients (36%) had inadequate pacing or loss of LV capture during ET, due to exceeding the maximum tracking rate (11%), chronotropic incompetence (7%), and LV pacing outside the fusion-pacing band (18%), caused by physiological shortening of the PR interval or exagerated LV preexcitation during maximum exercise. Post-ET CRT-device optimization included reprogramming of rate-adaptive atrioventricular interval (total decrease 23±8 ms), individualized programming of maximum tracking rate, or rate-response function. Drug optimization was performed in 32% of patients, and ET redone in 36%. Conclusion: In one of three ETs, an intervention in device and medication optimization was done to ensure a better outcome. Routine ET should be a standard approach to maximize fusion-pacing CRT response during follow-up.

Non-response to Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is an effective treatment option for therapy-refractory mild to severe heart failure (HF) patients with reduced ejection fraction and left ventricular (LV) conduction delay. Multiple clinical trials have shown that CRT improves cardiac function and overall quality of life, as well as reduces HF hospitalizations, health care costs, and mortality.

RECENT FINDINGS

Despite its effectiveness, the "non-response" rate to CRT is around 30%, remaining a major challenge that faces electrophysiologists and researchers. It has been recently suggested that the etiology of CRT non-response is multifactorial, and it requires a multifaceted approach to address it. In this focused review, we will summarize the definitions of CRT non-response, identify key factors for CRT non-response, and offer a simplified framework to address CRT non-response with the main goal of improving CRT outcomes.

Optimizing Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Devices in Follow-up to Improve Response Rates and Outcomes

Although cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) will improve symptoms and survival in selected heart failure patients, there still remains a high percentage of CRT recipients who do not obtain benefit from the therapy. During CRT follow-up, an effort should be made to identify and to treat reversible causes of nonresponse to CRT. This effort includes optimization of medical therapy, checking for appropriate and effective biventricular pacing, and treatment of arrhythmias and other reversible causes of CRT malfunction.

Potential benefit of optimizing atrioventricular & interventricular delays in patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy

Background & objectives:

The clinical benefit of optimization (OPT) of atrioventricular delay (AVD) and interventricular delay (VVD) in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) remains debatable. This study was aimed to determine the influence of AVD and VVD OPT on selected parameters in patients early after CRT implantation and at mid-term follow up (FU).

Methods:

Fifty two patients (61±10 yr, 23 males) with left bundle branch block, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤35 per cent and heart failure were selected for CRT implantation. Early on the second day (2DFU) after CRT implantation, the patients were assigned to the OPT or the factory setting (FS) group. Haemodynamic and electrical parameters were evaluated at baseline, on 2DFU after CRT and mid-term FU [three-month FU (3MFU)]. Echocardiographic measures were assessed before implantation and at 3MFU. The AVD/VVD was deemed optimal for the highest cardiac output (CO) with impedance cardiography (ICG) monitoring.

Results:

On 2DFU, the AVD was shorter in the OPT group, LV was paced earlier than in FS group and CO was insignificantly higher in OPT group. At 3MFU, improvement of CO was observed only in OPT patients, but the intergroup difference was not significant. At 3MFU in OPT group, reduction of LV in terms of LV end-diastolic diameter (LVeDD), LV end-systolic diameter, LV end-diastolic and systolic volume with the improvement in LVEF was observed. In FS group, only a reduction in LVeDD was present. In OPT group, the paced QRS duration was shorter than in FS group patients.

Interpretation & conclusions:

CRT OPT of AVD and VVD with ICG was associated with a higher CO and better reverse LV remodelling. CO monitoring with ICG is a simple, non-invasive tool to optimize CRT devices.

Rationale and design of the AdaptResponse trial: a prospective randomized study of cardiac resynchronization therapy with preferential adaptive left ventricular-only pacing

The AdaptResponse trial is designed to test the hypothesis that preferential adaptive left ventricular‐only pacing with the AdaptivCRT^® algorithm reduces the incidence of the combined endpoint of all‐cause mortality and intervention for heart failure (HF) decompensation, compared with conventional cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), among patients with a CRT indication, left bundle branch block (LBBB) and normal atrioventricular (AV) conduction. The AdaptResponse study is a prospective, randomized, controlled, single‐blinded, multicentre, clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02205359), conducted at up to 200 centres worldwide. Following enrolment and baseline assessment, eligible subjects will be implanted with a CRT system containing the AdaptivCRT algorithm, and randomized in a 1:1 fashion to either a treatment (‘AdaptivCRT’) or control (‘Conventional CRT’) group. The study is designed to observe a primary endpoint in 1100 patients (‘event‐driven’) and approximately 3000 patients will be randomized. The primary endpoint is the composite of all‐cause mortality and intervention for HF decompensation; secondary endpoints include all‐cause mortality, intervention for HF decompensation, clinical composite score (CCS) at 6 months, atrial fibrillation, quality of life measured by the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ), health outcome measured by the EQ‐5D instrument, all‐cause readmission after a HF admission, and cost‐effectiveness. The AdaptResponse clinical trial is powered to assess clinical endpoints and is expected to provide definitive evidence on the incremental utility of AdaptivCRT‐enhanced CRT systems.

Left ventricular wall motion analysis to guide management of CRT non-responders

AIMS

A discordant left ventricular (LV) lead position can be responsible for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) non-response. In this study, tailored optimization of the individual LV wall motion was evaluated for the outcome in these patients.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Two hundred and forty-six CRT outpatients were screened for non-response due to a discordant LV lead. In 17 patients, three-dimensional data of fluoroscopic rotation scan and echocardiography were integrated to analyse the individual LV wall motion with respect to the LV lead position. Optimization was guided by the systolic dyssynchrony index (SDI) and LV ejection fraction (LVEF) during different interventricular (VV)-delay programming. If re-programming failed, implantation of a second LV lead was performed. A discordant or partly concordant LV lead position was found in nearly all patients (16/17, 94%), which contributed to an unchanged baseline amount of LV dyssynchrony with either CRT on or off (SDI 11.3 vs. 11.0%; P = 0.744). In the majority of patients, VV-delay re-programming achieved better resynchronization, 4/17 patients needed implantation of a second LV lead. After 3 months, significant improvement of NYHA functional class (1 class; P = 0.004), peak oxygen consumption (10 vs. 13 mL/min/kg; P = 0.008), LVEF (27 vs. 39%; P = 0.003), and SDI (11.0 vs. 5.8; P = 0.02) was observed. Clinical and echocardiographic responses were found in 77 and 59%, respectively, with even good results on long-term follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Tailored optimization of the individual LV wall motion can lead to significant clinical and echocardiographic improvements in previous CRT non-responders with a discordant LV lead position.

Identification of Genetic Markers for Treatment Success in Heart Failure Patients

Background—

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) can improve ventricular size, shape, and mass and reduce mitral regurgitation by reverse remodeling of the failing ventricle. About 30% of patients do not respond to this therapy for unknown reasons. In this study, we aimed at the identification and classification of CRT responder by the use of genetic variants and clinical parameters.

Methods and Results—

Of 1421 CRT patients, 207 subjects were consecutively selected, and CRT responder and nonresponder were matched for their baseline parameters before CRT. Treatment success of CRT was defined as a decrease in left ventricular end-systolic volume >15% at follow-up echocardiography compared with left ventricular end-systolic volume at baseline. All other changes classified the patient as CRT nonresponder. A genetic association study was performed, which identified 4 genetic variants to be associated with the CRT responder phenotype at the allelic ( P <0.035) and genotypic ( P <0.031) level: rs3766031 ( ATPIB1 ), rs5443 ( GNB3 ), rs5522 ( NR3C2 ), and rs7325635 ( TNFSF11 ). Machine learning algorithms were used for the classification of CRT patients into responder and nonresponder status, including combinations of the identified genetic variants and clinical parameters.

Conclusions—

We demonstrated that rule induction algorithms can successfully be applied for the classification of heart failure patients in CRT responder and nonresponder status using clinical and genetic parameters. Our analysis included information on alleles and genotypes of 4 genetic loci, rs3766031 ( ATPIB1 ), rs5443 ( GNB3 ), rs5522 ( NR3C2 ), and rs7325635 ( TNFSF11 ), pathophysiologically associated with remodeling of the failing ventricle.

Meta-analysis of effects of optimization of cardiac resynchronization therapy on left ventricular function, exercise capacity, and quality of life in patients with heart failure

The contribution of postimplant optimization of device settings to the beneficial effect of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in heart failure is uncertain. We performed a meta-analysis to investigate the impact of CRT optimization on the improvement of left ventricular function, exercise capacity, and quality of life. We undertook a systemic review of the evidence from a search of relevant controlled clinical studies in the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases. Changes in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), 6-minute walk distance, and Minnesota Living with Heart Failure score at follow-up were assessed; the primary outcome was ejection fraction. A random-effects model was used to combine weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A metaregression was undertaken to assess the impact of potential covariates. Data were collated from 13 studies enrolling 1,431 patients (919 optimized and 669 controls). Pooled analysis demonstrated that the optimization procedure resulted in a significant increase in LVEF (WMD 2.6%, 95% CI 0.8 to 4.4, p = 0.001) as compared with a nonoptimized CRT. No improvements with the optimization of CRT were seen in 6-minute walk distance and quality of life (WMD 12 m, 95% CI 23 to 48, p = 0.49, and 3.6, 95% CI 2.2 to 9.5, p = 0.22, respectively); however, this part of the analysis was performed using limited data. Thus, these collated data suggest that the optimization of CRT leads to a significant but small improvement in LVEF in patients with heart failure. Additional, adequately powered studies are needed to evaluate the effects of this procedure on exercise tolerance and quality of life.

Effects of biventricular pacing on left heart twist and strain in a porcine model of right heart failure

BACKGROUND

Biventricular pacing (BiVP) improves cardiac output (CO) in selected cardiac surgery patients, but response remains variable, necessitating a better understanding of the mechanism. Accordingly, we used speckle tracking echocardiography (STE) to analyze BiVP during acute right ventricular pressure overload (RVPO).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In nine pigs, the inferior vena cava (IVC) was snared to decrease CO and establish a control model. Heart block was induced, the pulmonary artery snared, and BiVP initiated. Echocardiograms of the left ventricular midpapillary level were taken at varying atrioventricular delay (AVD) and interventricular delay (VVD) for STE analysis of regional circumferential strain (CS) and radial strain (RS). Echocardiograms were taken of the left ventricular base, midpapillary, and apex during baseline, IVC occlusion, and each BiVP setting for STE analysis of twist, apical and basal rotations, CS, RS, and synchrony. Indices were correlated against CO with mixed linear models.

RESULTS

During IVC occlusion, CO correlated with twist, apical rotation, RS, RS synchrony, and CS (P < 0.05). During RVPO with BiVP, CO only correlated with RS synchrony and CS (P < 0.05). During AVD and VVD variations, CO was associated with free wall RS (P < 0.008). CO correlated with septal wall CS during AVD variation and free wall CS during VVD variation (P < 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

In an open chest model, twist, RS, RS synchrony, and CS analyzed by STE may be noninvasive surrogates for changes in CO. During RVPO, changes in RS synchrony and CS with varying regional strain contributions may be the primary mechanism in which BiVP improves CO. Lack of correlation of remaining indices may reflect postsystolic function.

Comparison of dyssynchrony parameters for VV-optimization in CRT patients

BACKGROUND

Optimization of the interventricular delay (VV-optimization) in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) patients can be performed by evaluation of mechanical dyssynchrony. However, there is no consensus on which method to use. In this study, three conceptually different methods were evaluated.

METHODS

Thirty consecutive CRT patients were included. At day 1, patients were atrioventricular and VV optimized by left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) velocity time integral (VTI). At 6 months, 2D strain (2DS) echocardiography and tissue Doppler imaging (TDI) was performed at six different VV-programming delay in steps of 20 ms. LVOT and three indices of dyssynchrony were evaluated at each setting: standard deviation (SD) of time-to-peak strain in 12 segments (2DS-SD), SD of time-to-peak velocities in 12 segments (TDI-SD), and maximal activation delay (AD-max) by cross-correlation analysis (XCA) of TDI-derived myocardial acceleration curves.

RESULTS

Feasibility was 90% for 2DS-SD and TDI-SD and 97% for AD-max. Coefficients of variation for intraobserver variability were 13% for 2DS-SD, 11% for TDI-SD, and 6% for AD-max. A relative increase in LVOT VTI > 10% was observed in 5/12 (42%) nonresponders and 7/18 (39%) responders to CRT. Optimization by all three dyssynchrony indices significantly increased LVOT VTI compared to simultaneous pacing and optimal setting at day 1 (P < 0.05, all). LVOT VTI was highest when using AD-max, and AD-max showed the best agreement (k = 0.71).

CONCLUSION

VV optimization at 6 months acutely benefits both responders and nonresponders; however, dyssynchrony indices do not perform equally well. XCA has a high feasibility and reproducibility and appears to be superior to time-to-peak techniques.

Effect of atrioventricular and ventriculoventricular delay optimization on clinical and echocardiographic outcomes of patients treated with cardiac resynchronization therapy: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Optimization of atrioventricular (AV) and ventriculoventricular (VV) delays of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices maximizes left ventricular filling and stroke volume. However, the incremental value of these optimizations over empiric device programming remains unclear. The objective of this analysis was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of AV and VV delay optimization on clinical and echocardiographic end points of patients with heart failure treated with CRT.

METHODS

A standardized search strategy was performed and identified 12 trials comparing AV and/or VV delay optimization and conventional CRT device programming and their effects on various clinical and echocardiographic outcomes. Pooled odds ratios were analyzed using random-effect meta-analysis with Mantel-Haenszel method.

RESULTS

Combined data from a total of 4,356 patients with heart failure treated with CRT showed no differences in clinical or echocardiographic outcomes between patients who underwent AV and/or VV delay optimization and patients who underwent empiric device programming (Mantel-Haenszel odds ratio 0.86 [95% CI 0.68-1.09], P value for overall effect = .21 by intention-to-treat analysis).

CONCLUSION

The current literature suggests that routine AV and/or VV delay optimization has a neutral effect on clinical and echocardiographic outcomes based on pooled data from randomized and nonrandomized studies. Standardization of patient selection and optimization timing and method may help to further define the role of CRT device optimization.

A novel methodology for AV and VV delay optimization in CRT: results from a randomized pilot clinical trial

The aim of this work was to determine whether the use of a newly developed methodology (Alg1) for AV and VV optimization improves cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) clinical and echocardiographic (ECHO) outcomes. In this single-center pilot clinical trial, 80 consecutive patients (79 % male; 70.1 ± 11.2 years) receiving CRT were randomly assigned to AV and VV optimization using Alg1 (group A) or standard commercial procedures (group B). Clinical status and ECHOs were analyzed at baseline (_0) , 3 (fu1), and 6 months (fu2) of follow-up evaluating left ventricular end systolic (LVESV) and end diastolic (LVEDV) volumes, ejection fraction (EF), Minnesota test, and 6-min walk test (6MWT). Alg1 is based on a cardiovascular model fed with patient data. Baseline characteristics did not differ significantly between groups. Group A had a better clinical outcome and reverse remodeling. Remodeling was calculated as the difference (Δ) between fu1 and _0 and between fu2 and fu1, respectively: [LVESV (ml): ΔA_fu1 = -55.3, ΔB_fu1 = -13.5, p_fu1 = 0.002; ΔA_fu2 = -22.8, ΔB_fu2 = 3.0, p_fu2 = 0.04], [LVEDV (ml): ΔA_fu1 = -61.9, ΔB_fu1 = -16.1, p_fu1 = 0.01; ΔA_fu2 = -30.4, ΔB_fu2 = 11.3, p_fu2 = 0.02]; Minnesota test: total (p_fu1 = 0.01; p_fu2 = 0.04), physical (p_fu1 = 0.01; p_fu2 = 0.03) and emotional scores (p_fu1 = 0.04; p_fu2 = 0.03) and in 6MWT (m) (p_fu2 = 0.008). No statistically significant difference was observed in QRS width. Compared with current standard of care, CRT optimization using Alg1 is associated with better outcomes, showing the power of a tailored CRT.

Long-term clinical effects of programmer-guided atrioventricular and interventricular delay optimization: Intracardiac electrography versus echocardiography for cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with heart failure

Objectives

To compare the haemodynamic results and long-term clinical outcomes of intracardiac electrography (QuickOpt®; St Jude Medical, St Paul, MN, USA) and echocardiography for optimization of atrioventricular (AV) and interventricular (VV) delays in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT).

Methods

Patients with CRT devices were prospectively enrolled; AV/VV delays were optimized by either QuickOpt® or echocardiography. Patients in the QuickOpt® group underwent both echocardiography and QuickOpt® optimization, and QuickOpt® AV/VV delays were used to program the CRT. All patients were followed-up for 12 months.

Results

In total, 44 patients were enrolled. There was good correlation between AV/VV delays determined by QuickOpt® ( n = 20) and echocardiography ( n = 24). QuickOpt® was significantly faster than echocardiography-guided optimization. Cardiac function, 6-min walking distance and left ventricular ejection fraction were significantly and similarly improved in both groups at 6 and 12 months compared with baseline. In the QuickOpt® group, left ventricular end diastolic diameters were significantly smaller at 6 and 12 months compared with baseline.

Conclusions

QuickOpt® is a quick, convenient and easy to perform method for optimization of AV and VV delays, with a similar long-term clinical outcome to echocardiography-guided optimization.

How to improve outcomes: should we put more emphasis on programming and medical care and less on patient selection?

Many factors contribute to the pathophysiology and progression of heart failure (HF), offering the potential for many synergistic therapeutic approaches to its management. For patients, who have systolic HF, prolonged QRS and receiving guideline-indicated pharmacological therapy, cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) may provide additional benefits in terms of symptom improvement and mortality reduction. Nevertheless, in many patients, moderate or severe symptoms may persist or recur after CRT implantation due to either the severity or progression of the underlying disease, the presence of important co-morbidities or suboptimal device programming. Identifying and, where possible, treating the reasons for persistent or recurrent symptoms in patients who have received CRT is an important aspect of patient care. The present review summarizes the available evidence on this topic.

The impact of left ventricular lead position on left ventricular reverse remodelling and improvement in mechanical dyssynchrony in cardiac resynchronization therapy

AIMS

To investigate the influence of left ventricular (LV) lead position on LV dyssynchrony in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT).

METHODS AND RESULTS

The LV lead was prospectively targeted to the latest activated LV segment (concordant) evaluated by two-dimensional speckle tracking radial strain (ST-RS) echocardiography in 103 CRT recipients (67 ± 12 years). Mechanical dyssynchrony was assessed by anteroseptal-to-posterior (AS-P) delay and interventricular mechanical delay (IVMD). Concordant LV leads were obtained in 72 (70%) patients. Superior LV reverse remodelling (LV-RR; ≥ 15% LV end-systolic volume reduction at 6-month follow-up) was observed in the concordant LV leads compared with the discordant LV leads [51 (76%) vs. 13 (45%); P = 0.003]. Mechanical resynchronization responders (≥ 50% AS-P delay reduction at 6-month follow-up) obtained in the concordant LV leads [44 (66%)] was greater than in the discordant LV leads [10 (34%); P = 0.005]. The discordant LV leads located adjacent to the concordant LV leads (+1 segment; n = 22) and 2 segments apart (+2 segments; n = 9) were evaluated in a subgroup analysis. Mechanical resynchronization responders 6 months after CRT were as follows: in +1 segment [n = 10 (48%)] and in +2 segments (n = 0; P = 0.001). The concordant LV lead was the only independent predictor of LV-RR at 6-month follow-up (odds ratio, 4.177; P = 0.004). Independent predictors of mechanical resynchronization responders were AS-P delay (odds ratio, 1.007; P = 0.032), IVMD (odds ratio, 1.024; P = 0.038), and concordant LV lead (odds ratio, 4.691; P = 0.004).

CONCLUSION

Concordant LV leads in CRT provided more responders according to both LV reverse remodelling and mechanical resynchronization.

Atrioventricular and interventricular delay optimization in cardiac resynchronization therapy: physiological principles and overview of available methods

In this review, the physiological rationale for atrioventricular and interventricular delay optimization of cardiac resynchronization therapy is discussed including the influence of exercise and long-term cardiac resynchronization therapy. The broad spectrum of both invasive and non-invasive optimization methods is reviewed with critical appraisal of the literature. Although the spectrum of both invasive and non-invasive optimization methods is broad, no single method can be recommend for standard practice as large-scale studies using hard endpoints are lacking. Current efforts mainly investigate optimization during resting conditions; however, there is a need to develop automated algorithms to implement dynamic optimization in order to adapt to physiological alterations during exercise and after anatomical remodeling.

Impact of VV optimization in relation to left ventricular lead position: an acute haemodynamic study

AIMS

Left ventricular (LV) lead placement to the most delayed segment offers the greatest potential benefit to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). We assessed the impact of interventricular (VV) optimization on acute changes in cardiac output (CO) in patients with and without LV pacing of the most delayed segment.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In 124 patients, the most delayed segment was defined by speckle tracking radial strain and the LV lead position by biplane fluoroscopy. Patients were classified as either a concordant (LV lead at latest site), adjacent (within one segment), or remote (two or more segments away) LV lead. Atrioventricular (AV) and VV delays were optimized by echocardiography. Cardiac output was measured non-invasively and a >20% increase in CO from baseline (intrinsic) defined acute response. Changes in CO in patients with concordant, adjacent, or remote LV leads were recorded following atrioventricular optimization alone (AV OPT) and after combined AV and VV optimization (AV/VV OPT). Compared with AV OPT pacing, AV/VV OPT produced a greater rise in CO (5.45 ± 1.1 vs. 5.76 ± 1.2 L/min, P< 0.001) and higher acute response rates (48.4 vs. 61.3%, P= 0.041). In adjacent patients, compared with AV OPT pacing, AV/VV OPT settings increased the response rate from 36.4 to 63.6% (P= 0.037). VV optimization had no effect on acute response rates in patients with remote (26.7 vs. 33.3%, P = 0.581) or concordant LV leads (65.6 vs. 72.1%, P = 0.438).

CONCLUSION

VV optimization overcomes some but not all of the deleterious effects of a suboptimal LV lead position.

Effect of biventricular pacing on diastolic dyssynchrony

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to examine the changes in diastolic dyssynchrony with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT).

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the effect of CRT on diastolic dyssynchrony.

METHODS

Consecutive heart failure patients (n = 266, age 65.7 ± 10.0 years) underwent color-coded tissue Doppler imaging at baseline, 48 h, and 6 months after CRT. Systolic and diastolic dyssynchrony were defined as maximal time delay in peak systolic and early diastolic velocities, respectively, in 4 basal LV segments. CRT responders were defined as those with ≥15% decrease in LV end-systolic volume at 6 months.

RESULTS

Baseline LVEF was 25.2 ± 8.1%; 63.5% patients were CRT responders. Baseline incidence of systolic and diastolic dyssynchrony, and a combination of both was 46.2%, 51.9%, and 28.6%, respectively. Compared to nonresponders, responders had longer baseline systolic (79.2 ± 43.4 ms vs. 45.4 ± 30.4 ms; p < 0.001) and diastolic (78.5 ± 52.0 ms vs. 50.1 ± 38.2 ms; p < 0.001) delays. In follow-up, systolic delays (45.4 ± 31.6 ms at 48 h; 38.9 ± 26.2 ms at 6 months; p < 0.001) and diastolic delays (49.4 ± 36.3 ms at 48 h; 37.7 ± 26.0 ms at 6 months; p < 0.001) improved only in responders.

CONCLUSIONS

At baseline: 1) diastolic dyssynchrony was more common than systolic dyssynchrony in HF patients; 2) nonresponders had less baseline diastolic dyssynchrony compared to responders. After CRT: 1) diastolic dyssynchrony improved only in responders. Further insight into the pathophysiology of diastolic dyssynchrony and its changes with CRT may provide incremental information on patient-specific treatments.